Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette [pictured] has denounced an amicus field filed by the white nationalist group Traditionalist Youth Network seeking to help his defense of Michigan’s gay marriage ban. Mlive reports:

"The totality of the history of the Western and American traditions demonstrates quite clearly that same-sex conduct can be penalized," wrote [TYN] attorney Kyle Bristow, suggesting that legalized gay marriage would a "mockery" of historical customs and cultures.

"If a state cannot be permitted to define marriage as simply as constituting one man and one woman, then our culture will be taken down a very slippery slope that will see pedophiles, polygamists, zoophiles, those in incestuous relationships, and every other sexual deviant with proclivities now known or to be invented to challenge laws that, likewise, prevent them from marrying whom—what—they wish."

Following calls to denounce the brief from a conservative blogger at The Detroit News, Schuette released the following statement:

“There is no place in this discussion for derogatory language, and anything like it will be completely disregarded by the Department of Attorney General," "The Sixth Circuit should use this brief to line a birdcage, because that's all it's good for.

Schuette, however, continues to vigorously defend the state's ban on same-sex marriage, arguing that the state has an interest in the need to "regulate sexual relationships"

Comments

I didn't see in argument mainstream conservatives haven't made. A bit disingenuous of him to reject it.

Posted by: Ben M | Apr 1, 2014 8:35:47 AM

This amicus brief serves these Michigan right wing politicos right. You put on the mantle of hate against a segment of your population, other haters will jump on board. Are you GOPers just plain stupid or...what?

Posted by: HadenoughBS | Apr 1, 2014 8:39:41 AM

"state has an interest in the need to "regulate sexual relationships"" States DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT to regulate ANY human relationship.

Posted by: Ted | Apr 1, 2014 9:28:26 AM

@Ben M

You’re so right. Their legal arguments are substantially similar, if not exactly the same, as the State’s. So then why denounce the brief? I’m sure it’s not because it exposes quality of the people with whom Republicans are aligned.

Posted by: Carlie | Apr 1, 2014 10:30:49 AM

Next we will find out he has a "wide stance in the bathroom"

Posted by: Jaysonn | Apr 1, 2014 10:44:32 AM

A large part of western legal codes has been based on tradition or on morality of the past, which in turn was based on Christianity. Even today a lot of Islamic countries still have their legal system based on the Koran.

Posted by: simon | Apr 1, 2014 11:00:31 AM

Fortunately the founding fathers had this in mind when they wrote the constitutions to balance its excess.

Posted by: simon | Apr 1, 2014 11:08:05 AM

Birds of a feather...

Posted by: AKChris | Apr 1, 2014 11:36:11 AM

He's trying to prevent the mask from getting ripped off. Underneath there's nary a difference in their positions. Can he make a substantially different yet substantive argument? That's unlikely.

Ted: "States DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT to regulate ANY human relationship."

Really? Have you thought that one through?

Posted by: anon | Apr 1, 2014 12:02:12 PM

Their messages are no different. He's only concerned with the person behind the brief not the substance of it.

Posted by: dana | Apr 1, 2014 3:35:16 PM

....by your friends ("amici") you are known.....

Posted by: Wayne | Apr 1, 2014 9:13:12 PM

"I reject their right to say what I am saying." Just more examples of the right squelching speech and speakers they find objectionable.

Posted by: JT | Apr 1, 2014 11:01:53 PM

As usual, yet another click-bait headline, saying that TYN is a white "supremeacist" group when the article clearly states that they are a white "nationalist" group.

Believing that America was meant for white people is not the same as believing that white people are better than people of other races. SMH.